people. The plentiful and various fruits in the equatorial jungles caused laziness. Since the hot deserts of Africa and the cold mountains of Europe did not exist in Asia, Asians lived comfortably. They worked easily in earning their living. The continent of Asia became the cradle of civilization. Then an eastern country may work and progress also. The reason why the Ottomans lagged behind was not their being orientals or the climate of the country. The reason was in the religion and in the concept of qadâ’ and qadar.” Even if it would be admitted for a moment that the Ottomans misunderstood qadâ’ and qadar, abhorred themselves and surrendered to the events, the reasons which gave birth to their retrogression were different. Let us explain them: As soon as the progressives, who disliked Muslims’ surrendering to the event, opened their eyes, they took advantage of this state of the people and began to deceive them and to snatch positions and advantages. If they strove for the progress of the country, the people, whom they blame for having been accustomed to obedience and resignation, would also surrender to them, and progress would not be difficult at all. So, the fault belonged not to the people but to the progressives occupying high positions who did not lead the people to the right path. Revival of the people was definitely necessary, but such a large nation certainly could not revive itself altogether in a short time; those who revived first did not work in a good manner and thought only of themselves, lending themselves to vicious acts. They said, “Before the remaining people wake up, let’s provide for our own pleasures and advantages.” No matter what would happen after them, they strove to keep the eyes of the people closed so that their posts remain secure. The one obstacle preventing the people’s revival and progress became two. The people were confused whether to awaken from sleep or to escape the cunning progressives’ hypnosis. The retrogression of the Ottomans was caused not by those who had been sleeping since the old times but by the satans who appeared later. 32 - The reformer says: “We should reform the religion. We should begin with îmân first. Îmân could not be mere belief with the heart and affirmation with the tongue. The religion distinguishes good from bad, beautiful from ugly. Goodness should be the fundamental of îmân and evil should be the cause of disbelief. As a fard has various fundamentals, so îmân should have fundamentals such as justice, – 52 –

direction, patriotism, honour and honesty. The six fundamentals of Âmantu could not be Islam. Islam, which is a perfect social religion, causes misery merely for this reason. Îmân should be corrected in such a manner as to value the Muslim.” Is îmân solely to believe or should it include beautiful a’mâl (deeds, conduct or practice) as the reformer claims? Islamic scholars examined it centuries ago and parted into groups for this reason. According to the Ahl as-Sunna, îmân is only to believe with the heart, and if one cannot express it with the tongue, he will be forgiven. The Mu’tazila and especially the Khawârij, said, “Îmân could not be apart from deeds; he who commits a grave sin loses his îmân.” However, the disagreements between these groups were always based on the knowledge they understood from the Qur’ân and Hadîth. As for religion reformers, who know nothing about religious knowledge, they attempt to change îmân with their defective minds and corrupt intentions. They try to imbue the youth with this sophism, which sounds quite right but which in fact bears a very secret danger. By pretending to compare a Muslim who both believes in Allâhu ta’âlâ’s religion and follows it with the Muslim who only believes in it but does not follow it, they try to make îmân lose its value and to distort Muslims’ belief, rather than trying to defend following Islam. As a matter of fact, it is written in the book The Evidences of Divine Mercy by the excessive Russian reformer Baykiyev, “Muslims who have remained behind versus the disbelievers who have advanced cannot be called believers, and since every religion or faith is right, a polytheist or disbeliever cannot be considered bad.” Obviously, such writings are intended to belittle îmân, which is peculiar to Muslims. The excessive reformer tries to envenom Muslims all over the world with the idea of reforming the religion. Religion reformers in Muslim countries cunningly pretend to be Muslims. They say that they want to strengthen and improve the religion. When due attention is paid to their words, it is seen that they take the religion as a man-made system put forth by Muhammad (’alaihi ’s-salâm) but not as a religion sent by Allâhu ta’âlâ. The above-cited idea of reformers that good conduct must be added to îmân is not intended to reveal the knowledge discussed by Muslim scholars for centuries but to hold good deeds superior to îmân, that is to reshape Islam by discarding the religious fundamentals of îmân and ’ibâdât and mixing what they believe to – 53 –